Key Vote (How all members voted) Use of Military Force Against Iraq Bill Number: H J Res 114 Date: 2002-10-11 Sponsor: Rep Hastert, Dennis [IL-14] The Senate: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?vote_id=3201 The House: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?vote_id=3202 ========== Now everyone should book mark these two links.
John Forbes Kerry Democrat Yes. Joseph I. Lieberman Democrat Yes. Hillary Rodham Clinton Democrat Yes. Bye bye, presidency to all three. Edward M. 'Ted' Kennedy Democrat No! Patrick J. Leahy Democrat No! Robert C. Byrd Democrat No! Older is wiser.
Interestingly enough, Edwards came out in favor of Cindy Sheehan today. He could separate himself from the democratic pack for POTUS with a clear anti-war stance about now. Meanwhile, any number of congresspeoples could fairly vote for the war but now be against. After all, BushCo, the CIA, FBI, etc, sold faulty goods. Hell, public approval rating for the war 2 1/2 years ago was through the roof.
Surprising eh? They are both the same sex so I would have envisioned that! congresspeoples? Credit this to preparations for election rather than the war itself; 2 1/2 years ago presidential campaign race was underway and everybody supported the war... now the fair weather fiends are out in force!
So you're saying the administration was more interested in getting reelected than winning the war? God, I can't believe I responded to ITN...i need to shower
Horsesh!t. If a bunch of numbskulls on a soccer message board could see the administration was artificially trumpeting up this war, then seasoned politicians should have had the stones to vote their consciousnesses. But if it gives you the rationale to keep voting for these pansy-assed limousine liberals 'cause they're wearing the donkey on their uniforms vice the elephant, by all means, enjoy the rationalization... Keep doing what we're doing, and we'll keep getting what we're getting.
Hell yeah! Throw up any of those three "wise" men in the 2008 Presidential election, I'm all for it. Fish in a barrel. Heck, add Dr. Dean to that list too while you're at it, he was against the war back then. If the Dems were shocked in the past two elections, just see what would happen if any of those four bozos were to win the Dem nomination in '08. It would be Mondale'84 II. Seriously though, Dems have a better shot of winning the oval office with the top three Dems on your list by long, long, long way. Even if they voted for the war - lefties wouldn't have any alternatives. Oh yeah they do . . Ralph Nader!!!!
Democrats split over position on Iraq War http://news.yahoo.com/s/washpost/20050822/pl_washpost/democrats_split_over_position_on_iraq_war
I think you are a bozo for saying that. I really like to see Ted Kennedy run for president. He is a morally courageous man. Unlike Chuck Hagel (ITN take notes: perfect definition of fair weather fan), Ted didn't go against war because Bush's poll number is low right now. Like me, he truly believe this war is wrong. But Ted is not just right on the war issue, he is right on almost all of the issues concerning the welfare of this country. A true American hero.
Whoa, whoa bad dog! Don't get me wrong, I also want Ted to run. I'm a bigtime Teddy fan. In fact, I would help his campaign if he decided to make a go of it . . . again. He'd be great for the election process. Hey, I pulled hard for Dean in the last Democrat nomination; I was talking the good doctor up to any Democrat I knew months before the Iowa caucus. After seeing some of his speeches on CSPAN, he inspired me to action. If he didn't implode during the weeks running up to Iowa, he would have been the man . . . and the last election would've been much, much easier to win than it was against Kerry.
Not necessarily. They will all say that they had grave reservations and relied on faulty intelligence (true & true). They'll all be jumping on Chuck Hagel's ship soon.
Some other no to the Iraq War votes (randomly selected, of course) Barbara Boxer Carl Levin Russell Feingold Paul Wellstone Ron Wyden
I think you'll get a kick out of this: "In his introduction, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy (yes that's right, a United States Senator wrote the introduction) wrote that Meltzer "takes a timeless character and remolds him as a perfect reflection of our time". That may be a bit overblown, but Meltzer certainly manages to build a touchingly sentimental story around a man who's still a bit of the old-fashioned hero, a screwed-up man riddled with doubts about his second chance. "
I too, would love to see Teddy run for president, with all his moral courage . I wish he would run against Chuck Hagel. Then a third party might actually have a chance!!
Vote for Teddy. A morally courageous man! And a true American hero! (This message paid for by rum-runners for Kennedy.)
It is all about TERM LIMITS! This is the only answer to this problem. It is all about re-electability. Those Democrats who voted against the war are all very brave, and probably in not-too-hotly-contested districts. Those democrats who voted against the war deserve our praise. However, those who voted for the war were steamrolled into believing it would be a piece of cake, that barrels of uranium were going to show up, swimming pools at Saddam's palaces would be filled with chemical weapons. If this cakewalk proves true, and you voted "no," the posters lining the local intersections would say "Vote against *democrat*, he's a pu$$y and voted "no." However, if you take the politically expedient route, you vote yes and then claim later on that you were just 'duped' by the highly intelligent and experienced administration with their fancy anthrax vials and yellowcake stories. Those of you who believe that our representatives should represent us and not just try to keep themselves and their party members in office should support term limits. Ask Newt Gingrich.